EuroChoices最新文献

Cet article explore les groupes de discussion d'agriculteurs (FDG), une méthode d'apprentissage entre pairs en Irlande du Nord, et examine la perception de leur efficacité par les animateurs et les membres. Encadrés par des animateurs, les FDG visent à favoriser le transfert de connaissances, à accroître la productivité agricole et à encourager l'adoption de nouvelles technologies grâce à des activités telles que des visites de fermes de démonstration et des ateliers. À partir de données issues de deux enquêtes menées respectivement auprès des membres et des animateurs, nous avons constaté que les membres des FDG appréciaient les interactions sociales avec les autres membres ainsi que les visites de fermes présentant le fonctionnement de l'exploitation. Les animateurs préféraient des tailles de groupes réduites et flexibles pour des discussions plus ciblées. Membres et animateurs ont perçu les avantages de cette méthode : l'amélioration des liens sociaux et le potentiel à favoriser l'apprentissage par l'échange de connaissances et de compétences avec leurs pairs.

Parmi les défis rencontrés par les animateurs figurait la nécessité de motiver les membres à participer régulièrement et à partager des informations financières concernant leur exploitation agricole. Les membres et les animateurs ont recommandé une plus grande flexibilité des modalités de mise en œuvre, le maintien de groupes plus réduits et un équilibre entre réunions en présentiel et virtuelles lorsque cela était possible. Globalement, les groupes de discussion entre pairs constituent un précieux outil de partage des connaissances et de renforcement des relations en agriculture, avec des implications en termes de politique qui favorisent l'adoption de méthodes d'apprentissage variées.

Dieser Artikel befasst sich mit Diskussionsgruppen für Landwirtinnen und Landwirte (Farmer Discussion Groups, FDG), einer Peer-to-Peer-Lernmethode in Nordirland, und untersucht, wie Moderierende und Mitglieder die Wirksamkeit dieser Gruppen wahrnehmen. FDG werden von Moderatorinnen und Moderatoren geleitet und zielen darauf ab, den Wissenstransfer zu fördern, die Produktivität landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe zu steigern und die Einführung neuer Technologien durch Aktivitäten wie Besuche von Demonstrationsbetrieben und Workshops zu unterstützen. Anhand von Umfragedaten aus zwei Umfragen unter Mitgliedern bzw. Moderierenden haben wir festgestellt, dass FDG-Mitglieder die sozialen Interaktionen mit anderen Mitgliedern sowie Besuche auf landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben, bei denen gezeigt wurde, wie der Betrieb geführt wird, schätzten. Moderierende bevorzugten kleine, flexible Gruppengrößen für gezieltere Diskussionen. Sowohl Mitglieder als auch Moderierende sahen die Vorteile der Methode in der Verbesserung der sozialen Beziehungen und in ihrem Potenzial, das Lernen durch den Austausch von Wissen und Fähigkeiten mit Gleichgesinnten zu unterstützen.

Zu den Herausforderungen, denen sich die Mod

Nous soulignons l'importance d'impliquer les jeunes dans les décisions concernant l'avenir des zones de montagne, en tant que lieux de vie et de travail attractifs et durables. En nous appuyant sur l'engagement de plus de 1 300 jeunes à travers l'Europe, nous mettons en lumière leurs espoirs et leurs craintes quant à l'avenir des zones de montagne européennes. Nous examinons comment les expériences des jeunes dans quatre zones de montagne européennes (Roumanie, Écosse, Espagne et Turquie) se comparent aux objectifs de plusieurs politiques et mécanismes européens (ou de l'Union européenne) pour les zones rurales, tels que la Vision européenne à long terme pour les zones rurales (LTVRA) et le Manifeste de la jeunesse d'EUROPARC. Nous soutenons que les points de vue et les priorités des jeunes européens, issus des pays membres et non membres de l'Union européenne, doivent être davantage intégrés à ces politiques et visions à l'avenir. Sans ces améliorations, ces zones de montagne pourraient avoir du mal à maintenir leur résilience et leur durabilité. Nous appelons à des opportunités plus adaptées pour que les jeunes puissent rester, s'installer et créer des entreprises dans les zones rurales de montagne. Ces opportunités pourraient être facilitées par une refonte des dispositifs de subventions et d'aides existants, ou par des opportunités de collaboration entre les jeunes et les entreprises locales de montagne existantes.

Wir betonen, wie wichtig es ist, junge Menschen in die Entscheidungsfindung über die Zukunft der Berggebiete als attraktive und nachhaltige Lebens- und Arbeitsorte einzubeziehen. Auf der Grundlage von Gesprächen mit über 1.300 jungen Menschen in ganz Europa präsentieren wir ihre Hoffnungen und Befürchtungen für die Zukunft der europäischen Berggebiete. Wir untersuchen, inwiefern die Erfahrungen junger Menschen in vier europäischen Bergregionen (in Rumänien, Schottland, Spanien und der Türkei) mit den Zielen mehrerer europäischer (oder EU-) Politiken und Politikmechanismen für ländliche Gebiete, wie der Langfristigen Vision für ländliche Gebiete in Europa (LTVRA) und dem Jugendmanifest von EUROPARC, übereinstimmen. Wir argumentieren, dass die Ansichten und Prioritäten junger Menschen aus EU- und Nicht-EU-Ländern künftig stärker in diese Politiken und Visionen einbezogen werden müssen. Ohne entsprechende Verbesserungen könnten diese Berggebiete in Zukunft Schwierigkeiten haben, ihre Widerstandsfähigkeit und Nachhaltigkeit aufrechtzuerhalten. Wir fordern maßgeschneiderte Möglichkeiten für junge Menschen, in ländlichen Berggebieten zu bleiben, dorthin zu ziehen und dort Unternehmen zu gründen. Dies könnte durch eine Überarbeitung der bestehenden Subventions- und Förderprogramme oder durch die Schaffung von Möglichkeiten für Kooperationen zwischen jungen Menschen und bestehenden lokalen Bergunternehmen unterstützt werden.

This study offers valuable insights into farmers’ perspectives on the use of feed additives (3-NOP) in reducing methane emissions, and highlights associated obstacles that may prevent the accelerated uptake of GHG mitigation measures. Our data originate from a survey of 239 Finnish dairy farmers. While most farmers acknowledge the importance of climate issues, only a small percentage consider the reduction of the environmental impact of milk production to be the responsibility of the producer. Still, the farmers would prefer to decide for themselves how to reduce emissions, which demonstrates that resistance toward external directives might exist. In addition, there is a discrepancy between economically viable and environmentally responsible management, and this makes farmers more preoccupied with profitability. Furthermore, most farmers consider the feed additives to be safe. However, their efficiency in emission reduction remains unclear to many which contributes to hesitation in adoption. Thus, improved communication and education towards sustainable practices is needed. Strengthening dialogue among researchers, advisors, policymakers and farmers can help clarify the environmental purpose of feed additives and address uncertainties about their effectiveness and safety. Targeted educational efforts should focus on practical, science-based methods for methane reduction and build confidence through transparent information and real-life examples.

Farm digitalisation is revolutionising European agriculture, offering enhanced productivity, resource efficiency and sustainability. Technologies like sensors, robotics and data-driven tools enable precise decision-making thereby reducing time and resource use. This article draws on insights from 18 focus groups in European living labs, engaging farmers, policymakers and advisors to explore the trade-offs of digital adoption.

Key benefits include time-saving tools that streamline operations, promote sustainability and support innovative business models. Digital platforms improve traceability, reduce chemical inputs and enhance food safety. Farmers also value how technology attracts younger generations and fosters inclusivity. Examples from France, Germany, Hungary and Italy illustrate region-specific applications, such as real-time data use and soil-scanning technologies.

However, significant challenges accompany digitalisation. Farmers cite high costs, a steep learning curve and infrastructure gaps like limited internet connectivity. Trust issues persist among farmers, governments and technology providers, while concerns over data ownership and governance hinder adoption. Small farms face disproportionate burdens due to financial constraints and skill shortages.

This study underscores the need for equitable support systems, transparent governance and tailored solutions to bridge gaps. By addressing these challenges, Europe can ensure farm digitalisation fosters sustainability and benefits all stakeholders, aligning with broader goals like the European Green Deal.

Coherence in policy approaches across countries is crucial for achieving common GHG emission reduction goals at lower costs. Agro-economic models like Aglink-Cosimo, including global fertiliser markets, are useful for analyzing the anticipated effects of GHG reduction policies on food commodity markets. These policies can significantly affect domestic industry competitiveness, either positively or negatively. Such assessment tools can enhance evidence-based policy discussions and formation. We include in the baseline a EU ETS carbon price on fertiliser production in the EU as of 2026, without free allowances at 100 USD/tonne of CO2-eq emitted. Carbon pricing is assumed to be applied by the EU, Canada and the USA to fertiliser production from 2026 onwards.

The results of the analysis presented in this article indicate that a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) significantly impacts fertiliser trade. A unilateral CBAM tariff affects EU fertiliser trade more than a common CBAM tariff adopted by a coalition of countries. These effects depend heavily on the volume of bilateral trade within club countries. Fertiliser markets influence commodity production and prices modestly due to the price inelasticity of fertiliser demand by farmers and the buffering role of trade in response to price shocks. In terms of GHG emissions, a climate club scenario results in lower total world emissions compared to a unilateral CBAM scenario.

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the agricultural research agenda are evolving at the same time. Although the past offers several examples of how research has influenced the CAP in terms of both objectives (progressive inclusion of environmental issues) and instruments (decoupling of income support measures, inefficiency of the ‘greening’ measure of the 2014–2020 CAP), assessing the impacts of agricultural research on the CAP is difficult for many reasons. Such an assessment requires a clear picture of agricultural research programmes, themes and results. It also calls for a robust analytical framework linking research programmes to CAP objectives and instruments in a context where both evolve simultaneously, are influenced by many other determinants, and vary over time depending on the political orientation of governments. Furthermore, European agriculture is influenced by many public policies other than the CAP, at both European Union and Member State level. Research and innovation efforts must ultimately be assessed according to their impacts not on the CAP but on agriculture, food and rural development in a context where assessment criteria must cover all sustainability dimensions, including resilience aspects. We conclude by emphasizing the need for both policy-makers and researchers to recognise explicitly that not all policy objectives are mutually compatible.

The economic, ecological and animal welfare impacts of fur farming in the European Union have been debated for decades, culminating in proposals for an EU-wide ban on keeping animals solely for fur production. The Covid-19 pandemic further intensified these discussions, particularly within individual Member States.

This study analyses the economic trends, environmental consequences and disease risks associated with fur farming, providing insights to inform political and societal debate. Our findings indicate that, even before the pandemic, fur exports and consumer demand were in steady decline. This trend has been driven by shifting consumer preferences, major fashion brands phasing out fur, and growing concerns over animal welfare and sustainability. Additionally, the industry has been linked to biodiversity threats, zoonotic disease transmission, and negative environmental impacts, including a high carbon footprint.

While concerns remain over the relocation of fur farming to regions with weaker regulations, the industry requires a strategic transition. Supporting fur farmers in shifting to alternative activities, for example, through training, targeted subsidies, compensation and other policy incentives, can help repurpose land and employment towards viable and sustainable alternatives.

As one of the world's largest players in global trade, the EU pursues an open, sustainable and assertive trade strategy. The recent conclusions and ongoing negotiations of 10 European Union Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with Australia, Chile, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Mercosur bloc (comprising Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay), Mexico, New Zealand, the Philippines and Thailand are expected to diversify the EU's agri-food trade and enhance the resilience of its food supply chain. This resilience hinges on diversifying import sources and market outlets, which can be achieved through a robust trade policy that ensures access to a sufficient supply of affordable food for citizens. A two-step modelling approach was employed to assess ex-ante the cumulative economic impact of these FTAs on food commodity trade, production, consumption and prices in 2032.

The analysis reveals that both EU imports and exports increase in value in the simulated scenarios, with notable sectoral variations. On the one hand, exports of dairy products and pig meat exhibit significant growth. On the other hand, potential vulnerabilities of the EU beef, poultry meat, sugar and rice sectors are identified.

The study also examines the impact of the United Kingdom's trade agenda on the EU agri-food sector, quantifying the impact of the recent agreements between the UK, Australia and New Zealand, as well as the UK's future accession to the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement on the EU agri-food sector.